The United States has pledged to protect the island and de facto nation-state of Taiwan from any potential invasion by mainland China in the future. Both the United States and China are nuclear weapons powers. The U.S. tested its first atomic bomb in 1945, followed in 1952 by the hydrogen bomb. China tested its first atomic bomb in 1964, and in 1967 its first hydrogen bomb. China has pledged not to use its nuclear weapons in a first strike, although in the event of a war between the U.S.A and China over Taiwan this pledge could be broken under the pressure of events and the contingencies of war. The United States has not ruled out using nuclear weapons in a pre-emptive first strike, and neither has Russia. I wonder whether it would be wise for the U.S. to risk a nuclear war with China by becoming militarily involved in the defence of the small island nation of Taiwan from a Chinese amphibious invasion, and the loss of the valuable trade between mainland China and the United States which would result. In addition, Taiwan was once a Chinese province before 1895, and briefly again from 1945-1949, and most of its inhabitants are of ethnic Han Chinese ancestry. Some American military analysts have theorized that a Chinese military takeover of Taiwan would threaten U.S. military bases in the Asia-Pacific region, located on the Japanese islands of Okinawa, Kyushu, and Honshu, and in addition the lands of Guam, South Korea and Kwajalein Atoll. Nevertheless, the Chinese would think twice before trying to establish military bases in the former UN-US Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands of Micronesia, since the U.S. has made agreements with the Micronesian nations known as Compacts of Free Association to exclusively defend them from external attack. The nations covered by the Compacts of Free Association include the Marshall Islands, The Federated States of Micronesia, and Palau. Guam forms an unincorporated territory of the United States, while the Northern Mariana Islands to the immediate north of Guam form a commonwealth of the United States, much like Puerto Rico does in the Caribbean Sea. Although China's nuclear arsenal is small when compared to that of the United States, it has a sufficient number of strategic, long-range, nuclear capable missiles to strike many large American cities, as well as a larger number of medium-range nuclear missiles which could strike American military bases in the Asia-Pacific region. Then there is China's tactical battlefield nuclear weapons to take into consideration. Personally, if I was a key policy maker in the Chinese government, I would wait until I possessed a nuclear arsenal as big as that of The United States, Russia, and India combined before daring to invade Taiwan, and even then it could not be ruled out that a nuclear war with the U.S. would follow. If a nuclear war erupted between China and The United States today, the Chinese would run out of nuclear weapons long before the Americans would. With the likely continued rapid growth of the Chinese economy, the nuclear arsenal possessed by China is likely to grow, if for no other reason than for national prestige, i.e. that an economic superpower should also be a military superpower at the same time, which the U.S.A. is, and which Russia militarily still is, even if the Russian economy has shrunk from what it would have been if the Soviet Union was still in existence, but with a free enterprise economy, as Russia now has. China could potentially obtain its uranium deposits from the sea, as some nuclear physicists have claimed that there is enough uranium in the sea to last as long as the Sun does. See Peak Uranium. Extracting uranium from the sea is becoming less expensive with advances in technology, and will become even more cheaper as land based uranium deposits are used up. Thorium, used in nuclear breeder reactors, is about three to four times as plentiful as land based uranium deposits. Uranium can also be obtained from uraniferous coal ash, phosphates, shale, granite, and sandstone. Nuclear breeder reactors are far more efficient in obtaining energy than standard nuclear fission reactors, even being able to reprocess energy from nuclear waste or spent uranium fuel. See Nuclear Power. Should nuclear fusion energy become practical in the future, the isotope known as helium-3 from the Moon would become valuable, and there is enough helium-3 on the Moon to last for ten thousand years for nuclear fusion reactors. Nuclear energy could also be used to power electric cars and hydrogen fueled cars. See Hydrogen Vehicle and Hydrogen Economy. It is a good thing that uranium deposits from the seas of Earth might last as long as the Sun, because nuclear weapons through nuclear deterrence and its doctrine of mutually assured destruction has prevented a world war erupting again since 1945. In 1994, the American Congress foolishly ceased funding the development of the Integral Fast Reactor, three years before it was due to be completed, which would have hugely increased the safety of nuclear power plants. The isotope helium-3 is the most valuable resource on the Moon, and there are other lunar resources, such as titanium, nickel, the platinum group of metals, aluminum or aluminium, silicon, uranium, thorium, phosphorus, diamonds, water, and rare earth elements, all of which have been mapped and analyzed by China, India, Japan, and the U.S.A. in recent years. A pure, helium-3, fourth generation, thermonuclear bomb would produce minimal or no radioactive fallout, and one ton of helium-3 has the potential to make a nuclear weapon with a 75 megaton yield. A helium-3 nuclear missile would be suitable for destroying asteroids, and in 2013 NASA estimated that there are more than 1,400 potentially hazardous asteroids threatening the Earth. See China Leads Race to the Moon in The Diplomat by Jan Mortimer and Benjamin Finnis, January 7, 2015.If the U.S. insists on defending Taiwanese de facto independence, it should warn the Chinese in no uncertain terms that it intends to do so by taking the top-ranking officers of the Chinese military on an inspection tour of American military bases in the Asia-Pacific region at periodic intervals. Personally, I am optimistic that with China's continued trend towards a free enterprise economy, a large enough middle class will eventually emerge which would make it likely that generations from now China will also become a democracy. If democracy could eventually come to the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, it may also eventually arrive in China. Democracies tend not to go to war against each other. Nevertheless, under Vladimir Putin, Russia has come to resemble the guided, authoritarian democracy which existed in Indonesia from 1949-1998. China and Russia do not have strong democratic traditions and histories, but neither did Germany, Japan and Italy before 1918 and 1945. Many generations of economic prosperity, and a large middle class, are needed for democracy to take a strong root, as well as the passing into and out of history of each new human generation. Nuclear deterrence makes such wars of expansion as were World Wars One and Two unlikely.
Another potential flash-point in Chinese-American foreign relations lies in the South China Sea and its islands, in particular the Spratly and Paracel Islands. This area of the world may be potentially rich in petroleum and natural gas reserves, as is the case with the neighboring nations of Malaysia, Brunei, and Indonesia. China claims exclusive territorial and economic rights over this sea, a claim disputed by Malaysia, Brunei, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Taiwan. The last U.S. military bases in The Philippines were closed in 1992. Nevertheless, with China's growing economic and military might, the Philippine government might eventually allow the return of a permanent U.S. military presence on its soil. If this proves not to be possible, the U.S. could always establish a military base on the nearby Palau Islands, which has signed a Compact of Free Association agreement with the U.S.A., or in Malaysia, Thailand, Cambodia, Brunei, Singapore, or Vietnam, since these nations look warily upon the modernization and build-up of the Chinese military in the South China Sea region. Should the Americans attempt to impose a naval blockade of the atolls and islands fortified by the Chinese in the South China Sea, the Chinese would be wise to back down until such time as their intercontinental nuclear arsenal outnumbers that of The United States by a ratio of 3 to 1, which would mean that China has several more generations of rapid economic growth to go through, thereby proving the adage that patience is a virtue. The Russians, after several years of painful birth pangs, managed to build up a flourishing but government regulated free enterprise economy, until world oil and gas prices slumped, and before it attracted economic sanctions by foolishly and needlessly invading the Crimean Peninsula and Donbass region of The Ukraine. Russia could have re-located its Crimean Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol to the ports of Novorossiysk or Sochi. Russia should try to diversify its economy away from too great a reliance upon petroleum, natural gas, minerals, timber, and weapons and ammunition for exports. China should continue its steady advance towards a regulated free enterprise economy, the kind that resembles the mixed economy of Sweden, because a flourishing economy means a bigger budget for the modernization and expansion of its military. If it wanted to, the wealthy, modified free enterprise nations of Japan and South Korea could easily obtain a large nuclear weapons force. Currently Japan and South Korea are wealthier than China in per capita GDP (i.e. per head Gross Domestic Product), but the gap is narrowing with each passing year. China's new two-child policy for urban as well as rural residents should eventually be able to avert the threat of a rapidly ageing population and shrinking workforce. Another potential flash point in Sino-American relations is to be found in the divided Korean peninsula. However, if I was the Premier of China, I would not go to war over the bankrupt Stalinist régime of North Korea should it become embroiled in a war with South Korea and the American military forces stationed there and in nearby Japan. Although North Korea currently forms a buffer zone for China, I do not believe that the Americans would risk a nuclear war with China by crossing over the border from North Korea into Chinese territory. They refused to do so during the Korean War of 1950-1953 when China had no nuclear weapons, and would be even more reluctant to do so today. Moreover, the U.S. would not wish to become bogged down in an unwinnable, endless conventional ground war with the far more numerous Chinese population, as Japan found out in its protracted guerilla war with China from 1937-1945, and as the U.S.A. found out in its war in South Vietnam from 1965-1973. If it were not for Chinese economic aid for North Korea, the Stalinist régime in North Korea would face economic collapse, and its supreme leader might be tempted under such circumstances to divert attention from his nation's mass poverty by launching a military invasion of South Korea and/or nuclear strikes against American military bases in South Korea, Japan, and Guam. China has so far without much success tried to persuade North Korea to adopt the advancing free market reforms it has itself undertaken since the 1980's onwards. The North Korean military should launch a coup to overthrow the Kim dynasty and replace them with a general secretary with the brains for realistic economics. Maybe the Chinese should invade North Korea if the North Koreans are incapable of doing it themselves. I believe that the reason why the Kim dynasty of North Korea wants to have a nuclear weapons arsenal as a force for deterrence is in order to avoid the fates of Saddam Hussein of Iraq and Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, both of whom gave up their nuclear weapons program and thereby left their nations open to foreign invasion. Nations with nuclear weapons tend not to be attacked by outside powers. See The Saddam Factor in North Korea's Nuclear Strategy by Stephen Evans, BBC News, Seoul, 9 September 2016. China has told North Korea it would be on its own if it attacked American military forces in South Korea, Japan, and Guam with nuclear weapons, or even The United States itself, although it would defend it from a joint South Korean/American invasion, as it had done so previously in the Korean War of 1950-1953. See Beijing Warns Pyongyang: You're On Your Own If You Go After the United States in Google Search, by Simon Denyer and Amanda Ericson, in The Washington Post, August 11, 2017. One of the reasons why The United States refused to launch an invasion of North Vietnam during its ground war in South Vietnam from 1965-1973, was because China threatened to send its own troops as it had done so in North Korea from 1950-1953, although the Chinese fought a brief border war with Vietnam in 1979. Both North Vietnam and North Korea border China.
Currently China receives about 60 per cent of its petroleum from the Middle Eastern Nations bordering the Persian Gulf, with the figure for the U.S. being about 10 per cent. Most of Europe, as well as India, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea, are also more heavily dependent on Middle Eastern oil than the U.S. currently is. Apart from the U.S. itself, America receives its oil from such nations as Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, the sub-Saharan African nations of Angola, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Nigeria, and South Sudan, the North African nations of Algeria and Libya, the North Sea nations of the United Kingdom and Norway, the former Soviet states of Russia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and the Persian Gulf nations of Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, The United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. In the event of a war between China and the U.S. over Taiwan, the U.S. navy and marines would be in a position to cut off the flow of oil from the Middle East to China since the U.S. Fifth Fleet has bases in the Persian Gulf island nation of Bahrain, as well as in the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia, and there are other U.S. military bases in Turkey, Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman. Nevertheless, China has 48 per cent of the global supply of rare earth metals, and accounts for 97 per cent of 17 kinds of rare earth metals mining output, and China, so vital for the electronics industry, could therefore impose an embargo of its own. Electric cars need rare earth metals for their batteries, and electric cars are one day expected to replace petroleum and natural gas driven cars, although hydrogen powered cars have also been proposed as a replacement for petroleum and natural gas driven cars. Oil can be extracted from coal, oil shale rock, and bituminous oil or tar sands, but with the current technology used for this extraction, it is an expensive process to do so, unless the price of conventional petroleum rises steeply, which is expected to occur as petroleum and natural gas eventually becomes more scarce. Rare earth metals may one day be mined from the sea bed as land based sources become used up, and these metals are needed for electric cars and hybrid cars, wind turbines, and solar cells. See These Fearsome Robots Will Bring Mining to the Deep Ocean by Kate Baggaley in NBC News February 27, 2017, 10:01 AM ET. The sources of land based rare earth metals are often located in nations which are strong in resource nationalism, have unstable governments or are hostile to the interests of the U.S.A., which is the only nation in the world today strong enough to protect the rest of the free world in the post-Cold War era. See Plug-In Electric Vehicle.
Australia, which lies close to the mostly Muslim nation of Indonesia, a nation which outnumbers the Australian population many times over, has an army equal to Australia in technology and superior to it in numbers, but with an air force and navy which is inferior to that of Australia in technology. However, with Indonesia's rapid economic growth in recent years, this situation could well change in the future, according to an article published online by Hugh White, a professor of strategic studies at The Strategic and Defence Studies Centre of the Australian National University in Canberra. See What Indonesia's Rise Means for Australia: Northern Exposure by Hugh White, The Monthly, June 2013. Should a severe economic depression strike Indonesia, it could become a fundamentalist Muslim theocracy, as had happened to Iran in 1979. Such a régime might well try to invade Australia at some time in the distant future. There are Muslim fundamentalist régimes in the Indonesian province of Aceh and in the Sultanate of Brunei. According to Paul Dibb, an emeritus professor of strategic studies at the Australian National University, there has been a rise in Islamist fundamentalism in Indonesia since the downfall of the secularist, Suharto military régime in 1998, as witnessed by the Islamist inspired mob violence that helped to influence the jailing in 2017 for two years of the former governor of Jakarta - Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (Ahok), a Christian of Chinese ancestry, for blasphemy charges because of a supposed insult he made towards the religion of Islam. According to Professor Dibb, if current rates of economic and population growth rates continue, Indonesia by the year 2050 will have a population somewhere around 370 million people, and will be somewhere between the fourth or seventh largest economy in the world, with a bigger budget available for the expansion and modernization of its armed forces. See Could Indonesia Pose a Future Threat to Australia? by Paul Dibb, May 17, 2017, in The Strategist, by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. To guard against and deter the possibility of a future attempt by Muslim Indonesia to invade Australia, it is necessary that Australia should acquire its own nuclear weapons triad force, both tactical and strategic in nature. If Israel, with a population and economy which is smaller than that of Australia, has a nuclear weapons force, than Australia could easily have one of its own, especially with Australia's large uranium deposits, and as large as Australia can afford. Australia should not rely on the United States to come to its defence should Indonesia try to invade it, because Indonesia is close and the United States is far, and future American presidents might not wish to come to Australia's rescue. Even the presence of American marines in Darwin is no guarantee, because the Americans withdrew from Lebanon in 1984 their peacekeeping marines after suffering a major terrorist attack by Hezbollah on their headquarters at Beirut International Airport on October 23, 1983, an attack which claimed the lives of 241 American marines, sailors, and soldiers. The memory of Vietnam was still fresh in American memories in 1984, as is now the American-Iraqi War of 2003-2011. According to Christine M. Leah and Crispin Rovere in their article titled Get Ready, China: This Is Why Australia Needs Nuclear Weapons, published in The National Interest, November 21, 2015, a country may accede to the United Nations sponsored Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1970 as a nuclear weapon state if that state "manufactured and exploded a nuclear device prior to January 1, 1967", under Article IX.3. "Australia qualifies under this provision because in the 1950's and 1960's it hosted a series of nuclear tests conducted by the United Kingdom. These nuclear explosions were conducted on Australian sovereign territory (i.e. at Maralinga and the Monte Bello islands), with the active participation of Australian scientists and military personnel. These tests received financial support direct from the Australian government, with at least some explosions likely to have used fissile material that had been sourced locally from within Australia. No other non-nuclear weapon state party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is in this category. As Rod Lyon of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has sharply observed from recently declassified documents, Australian negotiators were very much cognizant of this legal basis prior to Australia joining the treaty. In sum, if Australia determined it was a national security imperative to develop an independent nuclear deterrent, it would be legally entitled to do so." Technologically advanced nuclear weapons powers today use advanced computer programmed simulations to test nuclear weapons. Christine M. Leah has written in the article called Time for Japan to Get Its Own Nuclear Weapons? (The National Interest, December 3, 2014), that Japan, South Korea, and Australia should acquire its own independent nuclear weapons deterrent, because China is near and The United States is far. She also wrote that despite the presence of American military bases in South Korea, Japan, and Guam, the United States might be reluctant to retaliate with its own nuclear arsenal against China should it launch an invasion against these nations and territories, because it would in turn risk a Chinese nuclear retaliatory strike launched against The United States itself. An erratic American President might give the impression to the Chinese that he would not use the American nuclear umbrella in defense of America's allies, only to unpredictably change his mind in a fit of rage once they had been invaded by an external aggressor. There is no point in Australia, Japan and South Korea waiting to obtain an independent nuclear weapons deterrent force once an Indonesian or Chinese attempt at invasion has already begun. Australia should also try to end its dependence on Middle Eastern oil and gas in the future, since the Arab Muslims might try to cut off their oil and gas supply to Australia should it go to war against Malay but Muslim Indonesia. Australia should in the interim build up a strategic petroleum reserve such as that possessed by The United States since the Arab oil embargo of October 1973 to March 1974. Australia in theory could achieve self-sufficiency in its petroleum needs by making oil from coal and oil shale rock, as well as making autogas from natural gas. South Africa during the Apartheid years, because of an oil embargo placed on it, obtained its petroleum from its coal deposits through its coal liquefaction company called Sasol Limited. The problem with making oil from coal and oil shale , as well as from oil or tar sands, is that it is an expensive process. A theocratic, fundamentalist Muslim Indonesia would probably not be deterred by a nuclear weapons armed Australia, but a heroic death for Australia would be preferable to living under Islamic Sharia Law should Indonesia at some time in the future try to invade Australia. Doctor Lawrence A. Franklin, formerly the Iran Desk Officer for Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and who also once served on active duty with the U.S. Army and as a Colonel in the U.S. Air Force, has written in the article titled Indonesia: Falling to Radicals (Gatestone Institute-International Policy Council, July 4, 2018 at 4:30 am), that there has been a rise of Muslim fundamentalism in Indonesia since the beginning of the Twenty First Century, accompanied by intolerance and violence directed towards Indonesia's Christian minorities (i.e. the result of Dutch Calvinist and Dutch Roman Catholic colonial era missionaries), and in the Indonesian province of Aceh located in the island of Sumatra, Shariah law is in place, with Koranically inspired physical punishments meted out to both Muslim and non-Muslim sinners, and where, after a lengthy reign of terror by Islamist militias, the vast majority of Christians have been driven out. I read this web site posted by a certain Paul Wallis, a CEO of the Sydney Media Services.com, on November 13, 2014, called Why Unimaginative People Are So Dangerous, which says that unimaginative people cannot predict future possibilities and potential dangers, because they focus on the here and now, and as a result ignore the past and the future, as well as ignore causes and consequences. Unimaginative people are not paranoid enough, because they are too complacent and gullible, and have a tendency to let their guard down, as well as allow themselves to be self-deceived by naive, wishful thinking.
Although I believe that the Americans should maintain their military forces in Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia, in order to maintain the balance of power and peace through credible deterrence, the European members of NATO, Japan, and South Korea could and should spend more on both its conventional and nuclear weapons forces. The United States should be strong both with and for NATO. In the European members of NATO, only The United Kingdom and France have nuclear weapons forces, although neither is a nuclear triad power (i.e. land, sea, and air). If Israel with its small population but robust economy can afford to have a nuclear triad, then the richer and more populous nations of Germany, Italy, Spain, Austria, Belgium, The Netherlands, Sweden, Turkey, South Korea, Japan, and Australia should also invest in both tactical and strategic nuclear weapons, as well as collective security in partnership with The United States. In future years and generations, the presidents of the U.S.A. might not always be relied upon to come to the defence of NATO or South Korea and Japan should they be attacked by Russia or China, which at this present time is a remote possibility which might become a distinct possibility at some point in the indeterminate future. Only a fool would bet that peace is certain to be maintained in the unpredictable future, although if certain circumstances prevail or certain trends emerge and continue, some things are more likely to happen in the future than others. The future is one of many possibilities, not certainties, although genetic predisposition and the situation people find themselves in heavily influence human choices, especially the personalities, hopes, fears, calculations, and perceived interests of world leaders. Today the nations with nuclear weapons are The United States of America, The Russian Federation, China, France, The United Kingdom, Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea. The policy of nuclear deterrence, known as Mutually Assured Destruction or M.A.D., means that nuclear war would probably erupt only as an extreme last resort, a miscalculation made under extreme duress. Prosperous nations tend not to recklessly risk nuclear war, and even the poorer nations of India and Pakistan, since becoming nuclear weapons powers in 1998, have tried to keep their sporadic border skirmishes localized and contained. This could all change should Sunni Muslim Pakistan fall into a severe economic depression and as a result an Islamist theocracy come to power in that nation, as was the case with Iran in 1979. Apart from the Baltic Republics of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Romanian-speaking Moldova, NATO should not include the other former Soviet republics as its members in order to avoid antagonizing Russia, although NATO should have a sizeable conventional military presence which includes both tactical and strategic nuclear weapons in Finland, Norway, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Greece and Turkey in order to deter any possible Russian attempt to retake militarily Eastern Europe outside the former Soviet Union. If Ukraine had not given up their nuclear arsenal to Russia in 1994, as did also Belarus and Kazakhstan, it is unlikely that the Russians would have dared to retake by armed force the Crimea and Donbass in 2014 from Ukraine. Those who are complacent about the future often live to regret it, or at least their descendants do. The NATO members, not including a now unreliable United States, should have a nuclear triad arsenal, both strategic and tactical in nature, and a conventional military force at least equal to that of Russia as a credible force of deterrence. NATO should also militarily occupy Libya in order to restore law and order to that anarchic, fragmented country and thereby stop the people smugglers who invade Europe with African economic migrants, many of whom are Muslims. NATO should also keep up friendly relations with Turkey in order to stop the flood of refugees from the mostly Muslim Middle East who use the Balkan route. Social security, citizenship, emergency relief, and cheap labour given to economic migrants and war refugees only encourages others to keep invading Europe. Europe should never become a racial, religious, cultural, and economic extension of Africa, both north and south of the Sahara desert, and of Asia, especially of the Muslim part of The Middle East, i.e. of South-Western Asia, and also of Central and South Asia. If the American President at any given time is foolish enough to give Russia and China the green light to invade and take over Europe, the Middle East, and Asia, it might even be necessary for the American military to overthrow him in a military coup and rule in the interim as a military dictatorship before a return to civilian rule. During this interim it could establish secure borders to prevent an uncontrolled influx of refugees/invaders, as Israel has more or less successfully done with the Muslim Palestinian West Bank and Gaza Strip, because The United States of America and Canada should never become an extension of Latin America, and in addition close vetting of would-be Muslim immigrants, and then replace the gerrymander of the electoral college system with either the first-past-the-post voting method, or the preferential or alternative vote counting method as is practiced in Australia. It also might replace the American republican system of government with the Westminster system of government as is practiced in the federations of Australia and Canada, in order to avoid gridlock and lame duck administrations which arise when different political parties control the Presidency and Congress simultaneously. The proportional representation method of vote counting too often results in short-lived, unstable, ineffectual and indecisive governments, as is most notoriously the case in Italy. The former U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said in a speech before NATO at its headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, in June 2011, that future generations of U.S. political leaders for whom the Cold War was not a formative experience may not consider the return on America's investment in NATO worth the cost, and that the American Congress and ordinary tax paying voters are growing impatient and less tolerant with those non-American NATO members who were not spending enough on their defense. In a March 2010 speech to a NATO conference held in Washington D.C., U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that "the demilitarization of Europe-where larges swaths of the general public and political class are averse to military force and the risks that go with it-has gone from a blessing in the 20th century to an impediment to achieving security and lasting peace in the 21st." Russia has made a comeback and China is growing from strength to strength. Some people might say that an isolationist American President in the post-Cold War era is an aberration, but aberrations can repeat themselves in the future if the root causes which led them to be appealing to voters is not addressed. There is no point for NATO to wait until a Russian invasion has begun before trying to gain a parity with Russia in its nuclear weapons deterrent force, and also in its conventional armed forces.
In 2015 42% of global oil production and 73% of the world's proven oil reserves were from the nations which belong to the OPEC or Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. In December 2016 66% of OPEC's oil production and reserves were in the six Muslim Middle Eastern countries that surround the oil-rich Persian Gulf, or in other words about 48% of the world's proven oil reserves in 2015 were in the nations with a coastline on the Persian Gulf, i.e. 73 multiplied by 66 divided by 100. See OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries). Should ISIS ever gain control of these oil-rich Arab nations of the Persian Gulf it would be necessary for NATO, preferably in cooperation with The United States, to seize control in order to prevent global hyper-inflation. The United States sends much of its exports to Europe and Asia, and these two continents depend far more on Middle Eastern oil than the U.S. does. Should the NATO military occupation of the oilfields of the Middle East result in high military casualties and taxes, and a voter backlash, it might even be necessary for military dictatorships to take over in the NATO countries. Russia should also militarily re-occupy the oil-rich nations of the Muslim Caucasus and Central Asia should they ever fall into the hands of Islamist theocracies. See You Can't Understand ISIS If You Don't Know the History of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia, Part I and Middle East Time Bomb: The Real Aim of ISIS Is to Replace the Saud Family as the New Emirs of Arabia, Part II by Alastair Crooke, former top British MI-6 agent in the Middle East, and author of Resistance: The Essence of Islamic Revolution, in The World Post, a partnership of HuffPost and the Berggruen Institute. The left-wing of politics is usually politically correct towards Muslim fundamentalists because of wishful thinking, believing naively that Islamists will respect the secular, progressive tolerance of multiculturalism, while the center and the right-wing of politics is politically correct towards the Islamists because of Muslim Arab-owned petroleum and natural gas, especially that which comes from Salafist-Wahhabist Saudi Arabia. Whatever the differing motives of the left, center, and right wing of politics in being politically correct towards the Muslims, the end result is the same, i.e. a cover-up of the real causes behind Islamofascism, which is the teachings of the Koran or Quran and the Sunna or Hadith. The only way to truly safely de-radicalize a radical Muslim is to persuade him or her to give up in believing in Islam. The moderate, secular Muslim author A.Z. Mohamed in his article called Why Britain's Deradicalization Programs Are Failing, published in The Gatestone Institute-International Policy Council, June 30, 2018 at 5:00 a.m., has written that Britain's attempts to deradicalize Muslim terrorists have largely failed because it is politically incorrect to draw attention to those many chapters and verses in the Koran and Sunna which encourage terrorism targeted at non-Muslims, and at heretical, non-fundamentalist, tolerant, moderate, secular Muslims. Personally, I believe there should be no tolerance for intolerant Islamofascism. All politicians in Western nations seek to gain the votes of Muslim minorities, especially those with large and growing minorities. Most non-Muslim apologists for Islamist fundamentalism have never bothered to read the Koran or Quran and Sunna, often afraid to find out about intolerant and violent Islamic beliefs that would destroy their god of left-wing political correctness or right-wing need for Arab petroleum and natural gas. At the end of the day the Koran and Sunna is what it is, rather than what the politically correct wishes it to be. Worse are those non-Muslim apologists for Islamofascism who have read the Koran and Sunna and still cover up for Islamist fundamentalists. Even worse are those Muslims who deny the existence to ignorant and gullible non-Muslims of intolerant and violent passages from the Koran and Sunna, whereas Islamofascist terrorists often make no effort to hide them from non-Muslims, proudly bragging and boasting about their personal adherence to them. At least Islamofascist terrorists often do not deceive non-Muslims about their true long-term intentions to create a global and theocratic Muslim caliphate based on Sharia law.
The petroleum and natural gas rich nations of the Muslim Middle East, North Africa, and Central Asia should try to diversify their economies for the future time when cheap energy alternatives are found to replace their primary exports, especially as oil and gas eventually becomes more scarce. Many of the largely desert Arab Muslim nations need to invest in water-from-the-sea desalination plants and pipelines as their underground fresh water supplies become used up by their growing populations. Not only is water vital for drinking, bathing, washing, sewerage disposal, cooking, and agriculture, but also for industry. Should they not take the necessary steps, then the over-populated Arab Muslim desert nations will face a major economic depression, and many of them will become economic refugees seeking to invade Europe by means of uncontrolled migration. Such a phenomenon will put a massive strain on the European economy, and will lead to the rise of far-right political parties as Caucasian Christian and secular Europeans become scared that they will become a minority in their own continent. The only way to really deter such an invasion of Europe by Muslim economic refugees would be through systematic genocide of the refugees/invaders, and military dictatorships would arise in Europe because apart from some ultra far-right political parties, the mainstream democratic political parties of Europe would not have the stomach for such a task when extreme necessity arises. Some of the center-left wing, centrist, and even center-right political parties of Europe might even try to stave off a far-right wing voter landslide by making the Muslim refugees/invaders voting citizens and members of the armed forces and police, but this might only result in a wave of military coups or putsches throughout Europe in reaction. If China becomes as wealthy as Japan per capita, the wave of Muslim refugees from the Middle East might even try to forcibly invade China via the former Soviet Central Asian republics. The Chinese could avert the potential risk of mass conversion to Islam by their own people by encouraging a revival in its Confucian, Buddhist, Taoist, and ethnic Han Chinese folk religions, which place a high value on ethnic Han Chinese patriotism and culture, as well as respect for those in authority who preserve and enforce peace, justice, and law and order. There has been no ethnic group, tribe, and culture throughout history that has not tried to resist invasion, whether it be on a small, medium, or large scale. The indigenous peoples of The United States of America, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, all of which were once former colonies of Great Britain, put up a valiant but futile resistance against overwhelming numbers and modern weapons. History should not be allowed to repeat itself. You do not need weapons to invade a nation, but it can be done by means of an uncontrolled influx of economic and/or political refugees who eventually come to outnumber the dominant ethnic and racial group of a host nation. According to The Acts of the Apostles, chapter 17, verse 26 in The New Testament of the Bible, God has determined the preappointed times and boundaries of all the nations on Earth, whom He has made from one blood, and that is why it is so evil for one nation to invade the lands of another. A nation that cannot defend its borders and sovereignty is no nation, but merely a slave of other nations. If Caucasians allow themselves to become a minority, through uncontrolled migration/invasion, in Europe, North America, Australasia, and in Argentina and Uruguay, they will become the laughing stock of the non-Caucasian world, especially of the far more ethnically and racially homogenous nations of China and Japan. The European farmer minorities of Zimbabwe/Rhodesia and South Africa have seen their farms confiscated without compensation by the black majority, with the consequence that their national economies have suffered severely. Ethnic groups who unwillingly become a minority, as is the case with the indigenous peoples of The United States of America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Argentina, and Uruguay, often fail to prosper down the generations. I believe that Caucasians are no more, and no less racist than any of the other human races on planet Earth. Tribalism, Ethnocentrism, and Racism is a human genetic instinct which can only be controlled, managed, and repressed in good times, and which all too often in bad times spins out of control, especially during times of run-away hyperinflation or extreme unemployment, as was the case in Weimar Germany from 1919-1933. Some sociologists argue that racism exists more frequently among those with a lower level of education and intelligence, but I believe that those with more education and a higher level of intelligence often hide and deny their racist instincts, even from themselves, at least until a severe economic depression strikes, when they often show their true racist feelings. The American biologist Edward O. Wilson published in 1978 the book called On Human Nature, which won the Pulitzer prize for general nonfiction in 1979. In this book Wilson said that human beings have a tendency to divide other humans into "them" and "us" - that is, foe or friend. This tendency evolved over the generations among bands of prehistoric, Stone Age, human and hominid hunter-gatherers whose bands ranged from around 25 to 100 persons. "These bands were like big families and had their own territories, which they defended. They saw other people as competitors for food, water, and shelter" (1). Wilson believes that our Stone Age, hunter-gatherer, tribal instincts are still part of our genetic make-up, and include such instincts as a dislike of strangers and a readiness to fight them (2). Modern humans evolved from a common ancestor which also gave rise to the apes, and the animal living today which humans are most closely related to are the chimpanzees, who are 98.4% genetically identical with humans (3). The other prehistoric ape-men, such as the Australopithecines, Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus, Neanderthals, and Denisovans are now extinct, although DNA tests have confirmed that modern humans living outside Africa have between 1-2% Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA in their genomes. Most human and Neanderthal or Denisovan hybrid offsprings however were infertile, as is the case with mules, the result of breeding between donkeys and horses. The primatologist Jane Goodall from her scientific observations has found that violence between neighboring social groups of chimpanzees occurs often (4). The Western provinces of the Roman Empire fell through a combination of civil wars and barbarian invasions happening all at one and the same time, while the more unified eastern provinces of the Roman Empire, which became the Byzantine Empire, survived longer, before it too later on fell to a combination of civil wars and external invasion. The western provinces of the Roman Empire had civil wars from 383-388, 392-394, 397-398, 407-411, 413, 421, 423-425, 427, and 432 A.D, and one of the reasons why the Byzantines became an easy prey to the Turks, many of whom were the descendants of Greeks, Armenians, Georgians and Kurds who had learnt the Turkish language and converted to Islam, was because there were four major and protracted civil wars in the Byzantine Empire during the 1300's A.D, not to mention those that occurred in the empire from roughly 1025-1300 A.D. In times of civil war, the level of drill, training, and discipline went out of the window for the Roman and Byzantine military forces, with rival factions even collaborating with the barbarian and Turkish invaders, many of whom were part of both the rank and file and the officer corps of the Roman and Byzantine militaries. In the many battles of the civil wars fought by the late Roman and Byzantine armies, the highly experienced veterans were killed and replaced by inexperienced conscripts and untrustworthy barbarians and Turks. The wages of the Late Roman armies were worth less in real terms than that paid to earlier generations of Roman soldiers (5). The barabarians who invaded and divided up the western provinces of the Roman Empire were of Germanic and Indo-Iranian origin. The Roman Emperor Tiberius should have allowed his general Germanicus Caesar to finish off the Germanic warlord Arminius in his tactically successfull, but strategically incomplete military campaigns east of the Rhine and north of the Danube rivers carried out from 14 to 16 A.D. in Germania, which avenged somewhat the defeat of the Roman general Varus by Arminius in 9 A.D. In addition, the Mongolian Huns as horse archers were armed with a powerful, long range, composite recurved bow (6).
History has shown that wherever the Muslims have become a majority in a nation, either by armed invasion, uncontrolled migration, and/or active attempts to convert non-Muslims to Islam by means of missionary preaching campaigns, Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, and polytheists or pagans have often become second and third class citizens, a barely tolerated and often discriminated against and persecuted minority subject to the same harsh, brutal, puritanical Sharia law as applies to Muslims, especially in such Muslim nations as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and North Sudan. In Saudi Arabia, Iran, and North Sudan, atheists, agnostics, and secular libertines are not tolerated at all (see Rights of Non-Muslims in an Islamic State by Samuel Shahid, Answering Islam Home Page). Sharia law includes such extreme corporal punishment as flogging, stoning to death, beheading, amputation, and crucifixion. The Sunna or Hadith even has accounts of the Prophet Muhammad ordering his opponents to be burnt to death. Both the Koran or Quran and Sunna or Hadith sanction polygamy, slavery, the rape of slaves by their masters, marital rape, honor killings, iconoclasm (Exodus 20:3-6, Deuteronomy 5:7-10, Exodus 25:17-22, Exodus 26:1, Exodus 26:31, Exodus 32, Ezekiel 18, Deuteronomy 24:16, Exodus 22:25, and Deuteronomy 23:20-21, i.e. prohibitions against the worshiping of idols dedicated to pagan or polytheist gods and goddesses), and the second-class treatment of women before Islamic law. Pious, fundamentalist Muslims are assured that in Islamic heaven they will have full sexual access to 72 female virgins and immortal male youths, as much drinking of wine as they want, and as much food as they want. However, in their earthly lives, the Koran and Sunna forbids Muslims from pre-marital sex or fornication, extra-marital sex or adultery, homosexuality, lesbianism, and bisexuality (i.e. God is neither a man or a woman according to progressive Christians), prostitution, pornography, cross-dressing, the consumption of alcohol and pork, the use of narcotic, addictive drugs, gambling, usury or lending money on interest, theft, and apostasy or abandoning the Islamic faith. First time offenders are to be flogged or amputated, and second-time offenders are to be stoned to death, crucified, beheaded or burned to death, as prescribed by the Muslim law known as Sharia, which is based on the teachings of the Koran and Sunna. Muslim men are permitted to engage in polygamy, up to a maximum of four wives, marital rape, slavery, the rape of slave concubines, and wife beating as a disciplinary action, as is also permitted in the Jewish Old Testament. The Prophet Muhammad owned slaves, slave concubines, engaged in slave trading, and polygamy with ten wives, one of whom he married at the age of nine. I found out about the nature of Islamic heaven in a website article called Islamic Heaven: Allah's Whore House - The Naked Truth, posted on May 13, 2015 by a disillusioned former Muslim called Syed Kamran Mirza who quoted many chapters and verses of the Koran, as well as the Sunna, to back up his accusations. See also The Gay Community is in Denial About Islamism by Douglas Murray in The Spectator, 9 August 2016, 5:20 PM. The strict and puritanical morality of fundamentalist Islamism finds some sympathy from fundamentalist Christians of various denominations, and from ultra-orthodox Jews, although both of the latter sharply disagree on the Koran's interpretation of the Judeo-Christian Bible, and in addition the Jews reject The New Testament of Christianity, while the Muslims radically re-interpret the New Testament, as they also do with The Old Testament. Jesus Christ, when asked by the Jewish scribes and Pharisees whether a woman caught in adultery should be stoned to death as the Law of Moses prescribed in the Torah, told the scribes and Pharisees they could do so if they were without sin. Jesus, who is without sin, because He is God Himself in the body of a man according to John 1:1-5, refused to condemn the adulterous woman, although He advised her not to sin again, according to John 8:1-11, for adulterers will be punished in Hell. Jesus also drank wine at the wedding celebration in Cana in Galilee, where He also performed His first miracle, although Jesus agreed with the Apostle Saint Paul that Christians should not drink to get drunk (Romans 13:13-14, The Acts of the Apostles 9:1-31 and 13:9). Non-Muslim tourists and guest workers should avoid those Muslim nations in which Sharia law is in effect, since their home governments can do little to help them if Muslim judges sentence them under Sharia law. It is even dangerous and risky for a non-Muslim to stop over at an airport in a Sharia law Muslim nation on the way to another country. Only foreign diplomats and foreign workers for Saudi Arabia's royal government-owned petroleum company called Saudi Aramco have immunity from Sharia law, and U.S. military personnel stationed in The Middle East are not immune from Sharia law outside their military bases. The only way for American military personnel to be safe from Sharia law outside their bases in The Middle East is if the U.S. had a massive military presence there, preferably bolstered by other NATO troops, in order to make the Muslim Arabs fear and respect them. One of the reasons why the Americans completely withdrew from Iraq in 2011 to neighbouring Kuwait was because they could not get extraterritorial legal protection for their military personnel. The United States completely withdrew its military forces stationed in Saudi Arabia in 2003, where they had been since Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990. The presence of Western infidels, kaffirs or kufars, non-Muslims, unbelievers in Saudi Arabia had stirred up great hatred among Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi-Salafist, Sunni Muslim fundamentalists, since Saudi Arabia is the home of Islam's two holiest cities of Mecca and Medina. Islam's third holiest city is in Jewish Jerusalem. The Saudis only fear and respect the foreign citizens of such powerful nations as The United States of America, Russia, and China, and the Iranians hold the Americans in contempt. Because of Muslim Arab-owned petroleum and natural gas, a foreign nation would not raise a finger if one of its foreign nationals ran afoul of Sharia law in the Arabian Peninsula, unless the Arabian Peninsula was formally colonized by NATO. Many Saudis would like to overthrow their pro-American monarchy and replace it with an Islamist theocracy. ISIS and Al-Qaeda are ultra-Salafists, in other words consistent Salafists. Of the 19 hijackers involved in the September 11 2001 attacks upon The United States, 15 were Saudi Arabian citizens or ex-citizens. The last Shah of Iran, a secular and pro-American ruler, was overthrown because of a severe economic depression and the disloyalty of his rank and file military, most of whom were closet Shiite Islamists. The same thing could happen in Saudi Arabia if a severe economic depression struck it. U.S. President James Carter refused to sell non-lethal riot control ammunition such as rubber and plastic bullets to the Shah's security forces, non-lethal so long as one does not aim for the head, which meant that the Shah's soldiers had to use deadly live ammunition to disperse rioters, which only further enraged the Iranian masses into paralyzing the nation's economy by means of a general strike, which in turn harmed the wages of the Iranian soldiers. Sometimes security forces have little choice but to use deadly ammunition when rioters swell into a large, uncontrollable, violent mob. The fundamentalist/literalist and jihadist Sunni Muslim ISIS Caliphate, as well as Al-Qaeda, believe Sunni Muslim and Arabic Saudi Arabia does not go far enough when it comes to Islamic fundamentalism, and would like to abolish the Saudi monarchy and aristocracy, which it accuses of indulging in un-Islamic libertinism behind closed doors, and of being too friendly towards The United States. The Sunni Muslim Arab absolutist monarchies and aristocratic oligarchies of the oil-rich Persian Gulf nations host American bases in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, and The United Arab Emirates, in order to protect them from the Shiite Muslim, Persian fundamentalist theocracy which has ruled Iran since the overthrow of the secular, anti-communist, and pro-American and pro-Israeli Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi in 1979. Saudi Arabia fears that the Iranians would try to engineer an uprising among its Shiite Arab Muslim minority which lives in the oil and gas rich Persian Gulf provinces, and Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, and The United Arab Emirates also have the same fear. During the Cold War, and before the Iranian Revolution of 1979, the anti-communist Saudi Arabians looked to The United States to support it from the nations of Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Southern Yemen, and Afghanistan, which were once socialist nations allied to the Soviet Union, as were also Libya and Algeria. ISIS calls for the complete military withdrawal of American forces from the Middle East, the overthrow of the Arabian absolutist monarchies and aristocratic oligarchies, to be replaced with a world-wide Muslim caliphate and theocracy, the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction, the destruction of Israel, and the destruction or forcible conversion of what it believes to be the heretical Muslim sects of the Shiites, Alawites, Ismailis, Druzes, and Sufis, not to mention the Yazidis, Mandaeans, Manichaeans, and Bahais. The Muslim Shiites of Iran and Lebanon, in particular the Lebanese Shiite Hezbollah political party, have in turn accused the Sunnis of being heretics, and have also called for the destruction of Israel. Even if the Israeli Jews withdrew their military and civilian settlements to the borders which existed before the 1967 Six Day War, many Muslim fundamentalists would not be happy until all of the Jews were evicted or exterminated from Palestine, or forcibly converted to Islam, along with the small Christian minorities of various denominations who lie scattered throughout the Middle East since the conquest of a large part of the Greek Byzantine or East Roman Empire by the Arab Muslims in the 600's and 700's A.D. There are many passages in the Muslim holy books of the Koran or Quran and Sunna or Hadith which are both anti-Jewish and anti-Semitic in nature (see References to Jews in the Koran in Jewish Virtual Library and Treatment of Jews in Arab/Islamic Countries, in Jewish Virtual Library, Updated September 2011. See Koran or Quran chapters and verses 2:61, 2:88, 2:97-98, 2:121, 4:160, 5:12-13, 5:33, 5:41, 5:51, 5:63-64, 5:73, 5:78, 6:146, 6:118, 17:4, 20:47-48, and 62:6. The Sunna or Hadith, which is the recorded words and deeds of the Prophet Muhammad, are even more brutally anti-Jewish than the Quran. The reason why Israel has many military bases located in the Jordan River Valley in the West Bank, and in the Golan Heights overlooking the freshwater lake known as the Sea of Galilee, is because of its need to secure access to fresh water supplies. ISIS also calls for a sharp increase in the price of petroleum and natural gas exports, and for a complete oil and gas embargo for The United States, unless it pressures Israel into giving up its occupation of the West Bank and Golan Heights by placing economic sanctions on Israel, and also agrees to withdraw its military bases from The Middle East. The Saudis once before placed an embargo on the Americans from October 1973 to March 1974, when it supported the Israelis against the Soviet-backed Egyptians and Syrians during the Yom Kippur War of 1973, in a military airlift known as Operation Nickel Grass. In 1973, 12% of the oil consumed by The United States came from the Middle Eastern nations bordering the Persian Gulf. See 1973 Oil Crisis. Today, because of American oil shale rock production, the United States relies even less on the oil of Persian Gulf nations. President Richard Nixon was surprised by the Arab oil embargo, since he believed that the Arabs would not place one because of the loss of revenue from oil exports, and because of the need for American military protection by the Arab absolutist monarchies and aristocratic oligarchies from those Arab states allied with the Soviet Union, Iraq in particular. Nixon even contemplated sending American troops to seize the oil fields of the Middle East during the embargo by OAPEC (Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries). Arab oil sold to Europe during the embargo was often resold to the United States, at a marked up price because of the need to go through European middlemen. All the members of OAPEC lifted the embargo in March 1974, with the exception of pro-Soviet Libya. Since the overthrow of the Gaddafi régime in 2011, Libya has descended into anarchy and civil war, and as a result Islamism has gained strength there, as well as people smugglers who flood Europe with African economic migrants, many of whom are Muslims. In Iraq the Shiite Arab majority has gained power since the overthrow of the secular Saddam régime in 2003, and this development has worried the Sunni Saudi Arabians. There are many fundamentalist Shiite Arab Iraqi militias funded by Shiite but Persian Iran. The Sunni Arab minority of Iraq, who were in power with the help of Iraq's Arab and Aramaic Assyrian Christian minorities during the socialist but secular régime of Saddam Hussein, have turned in droves towards the Islamist ISIS as a result of their loss of power. The Sunni majority of Syria, many of whom support the Islamist ISIS, want to overthrow the secular Alawite Assad dynasty, which during the Cold War was allied to the Soviet Union, as was also Iraq. The Sunni Arabs of Iraq, before they fell from power in the wake of the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, were the rivals of the Syrian Arab Alawites. The Syrian Alawites find support from the Syrian Christians, Orthodox Shiites, and Druzes, and even some Sunni secularists. In Lebanon, the Syrian Alawites even have the support of some of its Christians and Shiites, some of its Druzes, secular Sunnis, and Alawites living in Lebanon. The Alawites, Druzes and Ismailis are Shiite splinter sects, all of whom are hated intensely by Sunni ISIS, as well as secretly by the more orthodox Shiites. The Druzes live scattered throughout Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel including the occupied territories. The Iranian but Sunni Kurds, unlike the vast majority of Iranians in Iran proper who are Shiites, are hated by ISIS for not being Arabs, and for not being fundamentalist Muslims. The Kurds are also hated by the governments of Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria who do not want to see a unified and independent Kurdistan, since the Kurds live in all four nations. Both the Islamist Sunni ISIS and Islamist Shiite Hezbollah, although hating each other, would like to destroy the Jewish state of Israel, and the Syrian government wishes to regain the Golan Heights lost in the 1967 Six Day War, when Israel fought the then Soviet-backed Syria and Egypt.
Today, Israel hosts six war reserve stock sites owned by The United States for the use of American military forces deployed in The Middle East, and Israel's intellignce agencies share information on jihadist and terrorist Islamist organizations in the Middle East and North Africa with the Americans. Israeli and American defence companies have also often worked together. The warships of the Sixth Fleet of the United States Navy, headquarted in Naples, Italy, make frequent visits to the Israeli Mediterranean port of Haifa. Israel is the one nation in the Middle East which the U.S.A. can rely upon to provide almost automatic access to its territory for its military. See Israel-United States Relations. All the other Muslim nations of the Middle East have proven to be unreliable in providing access to its territories for American military bases, as evidenced by the eviction of American military forces from Libya in 1969, Iran in 1979, Saudi Arabia in 2003, and Iraq in 2011. If the U.S. military was completely evicted from all the Muslim Arab nations, as well as from Muslim but non-Arab Turkey, it could only use Israel, Spain, Italy, Greece, and Cyprus as launching pads in order to launch a military invasion of The Middle East and North Africa. The British founded the Jewish state of Israel in 1917 in order to safeguard the Suez Canal, and to complete a land link between their Egyptian protectorate and their League of Nations Mandate territories of Jordan and Iraq. This land link would serve as an alternative means of transporting troops from Egypt to the Persian Gulf, and from there by ship to India, as well as connecting Egypt with the British Persian Gulf protectorates of Kuwait, southern Iran, Bahrain, Qatar, and The United Arab Emirates. See British Mandate for Palestine. The completion by the British of the Mosul to Haifa oil pipeline in 1935, which ran from Kirkuk in Iraq to the Mediterranean port of Haifa in Palestine via Jordan, provided fuel for the Allied forces in their campaigns in Greece, North Africa, Lebanon, Syria, Italy and southern France during World War Two. The Trans-Israel oil pipeline, completed in 1968, transported fuel from the Shah's Iran to Europe, via the Red Sea port of Eilat in the Gulf of Aqaba to the Israeli Mediterranean ports of Ashdod, Ashkelon, and Haifa. Since 2003 Russian oil has been shipped from the Black Sea port of Novorossiysk via the Trans-Israel pipeline to markets in East Asia. The borders of the Muslim Middle East and North Africa are the artificial creations of past British, French, Spanish and Italian colonizers. The Arab world is an unstable and volatile series of tribal chiefdoms, ethnic groups, and religious sects. As North Sudan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Algeria, and Egypt have shown, attempts to impose Western secular democracy on Muslim Arab nations all too often results in either anarchic failed states or anti-Western Islamist theocracies. Past Muslim caliphates sooner or later fragmented into warring, feuding, mutually hostile emirates and sheikdoms. Only strong, authoritarian, pro-Western and preferably secular governments can rule the Muslim world in the long run. The Muslim world would have to cease being Muslim for secular Western democracy to stand a chance of success in their countries. Should Shiite, theocratic Iran acquire nuclear weapons, it would probably use them against Sunni Saudi Arabia and Jewish Israel, and Israel in return would retaliate with its nuclear arsenal. Should the nuclear armed Sunni Pakistan become an Islamist theocracy, it would probably launch a nuclear stike against Shiite Iran, Jewish Israel, and nuclear armed Hindu India, and if Saudi Arabia gained nuclear weapons, and fell into the hands of ISIS, it would probably attack both Iran and Israel. If nuclear weapons struck oil fields, the burning black smoke emitted by the oil fields would pump radioactive pollution into the atmosphere, and the world price of oil would skyrocket. The nuclear doctrine of deterrence known as M.A.D. or mutually assured destruction would not frighten Islamist theocracies from using nuclear weapons, since they believe it would hasten the coming of the Mahdi and the end of days which lead to the Last Judgment of Allah. See Islamic Eschatology. The reason why Saddam Hussein refused to reveal that he had no weapons of mass destruction before the United States invasion of Iraq in 2003, was because he did not wish to have Iraq appear militarily weak before Iran. Iraq fought a long war with Iran from 1980-1988. Saddam Hussein also said he had no wish to form an alliance with Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda terrorist organization because he regarded Osama the Muslim fundamentalist to be opposed to his secular, socialist Iraqi Ba'athist state, and who therefore could have ended up eventually turning on him. See Saddam Hussein Told of Fearing Iran More Than U.S. by Scott Shane, The New York Times, July 2, 2009, Saddam Hussein Said WMD Talk Helped Him Look Strong to Iran by Glenn Kessler, Washington Post Staff Writer, Thursday, July 2, 2009 and FBI Files: Saddam Feared Iran More Than U.S. by James Gordon Meek, Daily News Washington Bureau, Wednesday, June 24, 2009. The Republican administration of George Bush junior refused to listen to doubts expressed by the Central Intelligence Agency or C.I.A. that Saddam Hussein's Iraq still had weapons of mass destruction in 2001-2003, or even contacts of a serious nature with Al Qaeda, a case of the lions of the C.I.A. led by the donkeys of the cabinet of the George Bush junior presidency.
All Muslims should technically be fundamentalists or literalists, since it is a core tenet of Muslim belief that the Muslim Bible known as the Koran or Quran is the recording of the literal words of Allah (God) as relayed to The Prophet Muhammad in a series of dreams by the Archangel Gabriel. They also believe that the Sunna or Hadith, which is the recorded deeds and words of the Prophet Muhammad, to be divinely inspired and historically factual. Many passages in the Koran and Sunna call for Muslims to keep fighting a Jihad or Holy War until the whole world submits and converts to Islam. History has shown that Muslim expansion has only stopped when it has run up against a superior military force (Why 'Moderate Islam' is an Oxymoron by Raymond Ibrahim, 03/26/2014, CBN News). The Muslim concept of the Jihad or Holy War, as well as the nature of Muslim heaven, can be found in several chapters and verses of the Muslim Bible known as the Koran. See Koran chapters and verses 9:5, 9:29, 4:95, 8:12, 9:123, 8:60, 9:14, 9:33, 9:73, 8:38-39, 8:12-13, 61:9, 61:4-11, 2:193, 13:41, 21:44, 68:44, 33:27, 25:52, 3:110, and 48:28-29 for the concept of Jihad. The harsh, brutal, puritancial Muslim Sharia law is based on the Koran and Sunna. Muhammad believed himself to be the last in a line of prophets sent by God which included such persons as Abraham, Moses, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Ezra, Daniel, Elijah, John the Baptist, and Jesus Christ, and Muslims believe that Islam is the fulfillment of Judaism and Christianity. Islamists forbid not only Muslims, but even non-Muslims, from challenging the literal factual truth of the Koran and Sunna on pain of death, as Salman Rushdie's publishers and the journalists of the Charlie Hebdo newspaper found out the hard way. The ancient religion of Persia or Iran known as Zoroastrianism had a great influence on Judaism when Palestine was a province of the Persian Empire from 539-332 B.C., and many of the books of the Old Testament were first written or re-edited during this period (see Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and Christianity by Hannah M.G. Shapero, 9/6/1997). Emperor or Shah Cyrus the Great of Persia allowed the Jews to return from their captivity during the period of the Babylonian Exile, after the Persians had conquered the Babylonian Empire, and the three wise men or magi who visited the Christ Child, i.e. Melchior, Gaspar, and Balthazar, were Zoroastrian priests. Under Muslim rule polytheists or pagans are forced to convert to Islam, while Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians, as prescribed in the Koran, are forced to pay a heavy poll tax or protection money known as the Jizya in order to pressure them to convert to Islam. Muslims believe that Islam is the only really true and perfect religion on Earth. According to the Koran and Sunna it is the duty of Muslims to try to convert non-Muslims to Islam, but Muslims who convert to another religion or to no religion at all should be executed if they refuse to return to Islam, and so should non-Muslims who try to convert Muslims to another religion (see Myths of Islam by TROP - The Religion of Peace.Com, The Quran's Verses of Violence by the TROP (The Religion of Peace) organization, Is the Quran Hate Propaganda? by the TROP (The Religion of Peace) organization, 'Religion of Peace' Is Not A Harmless Platitude by Douglas Murray, The Spectator, 17 January 2015, 9:00 AM, Do Islam and the West Share the 'Same Values'?" by Raymond Ibrahim, Frontpage Mag, September 30, 2016, The Moderate Muslim Majority Myth-What Exactly is the Litmus Test For "Moderation"? by William Kilpatrick, Frontpage Mag, October 17, 2016). Muslim fundamentalists believe that all non-Muslims automatically go to hell, as do also secular, non-fundamentalist and heretical Muslims, and so are therefore not innocent persons who can as a result be killed with impunity in terrorist attacks should the need arise in the cause for the defence or expansion of Islam. The Koran goes from peaceful and tolerant passages in its early chapters to bloody and violent ones in the later chapters, and there are also violent and intolerant verses in the Sunna. The later chapters of the Koran overrule and abrogate the earlier ones. The reasoning behind abrogation in the Koran is that it is alright for Muslims to practice Taqiyya or deception and lying towards non-Muslims in order to gain their trust and so thereby make them let their guard down, and thereby make it easier for Muslims to later on defeat non-Muslims when they have been reduced to an impotent minority. In Koran Chapter 3, verse 54, it is written that "and they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." See Taqiyya: Deception and Lying in Islam by the TROP (The Religion of Peace) organization. A disillusioned former Catholic convert to Islam, who eventually ended up leaving Islam, has posted an article on the internet in which he claimed that many translations of the Koran from the Arabic language into foreign languages are deliberately deceitful in order to lull potential converts to Islam into a false sense of security. See Former Catholic Convert to Islam: Study Islam and Leave It by J.J., 21 November, 2008, in Islam-Watch.Org. The Koran has at the very least 109 verses that urge Muslims to war against non-Muslims for the purpose of spreading Islamic rule. See The Quran's Verses of Violence by the TROP (The Religion of Peace) organization. In the last ten years of the life of the Prophet Muhammad, and the one hundred years following his death, Islam spread from the Arabian Peninsula as far west as Spain and as far east as India and Central Asia through aggressive warfare and deliberate campaigns of conquest. According to the Koran, Jesus is the second most important prophet of Islam after Muhammad, but he is not the Son of God. In fact, at the end of days according to the Koran and Sunna, Jesus will return with the Prophet Muhammad to destroy the Christian cross and all religions other than Islam. See Myths of Islam: Muslims Believe in Jesus in TROP (The Religion of Peace Organization). So long as there are Muslim minorities in the nations of the secular Western world, and so long as these nations are involved in the wars and state politics of Muslim nations, and prevent the coming to power of Islamist theocracies, and so long as they do not put economic sanctions on Israel because of is semi-apartheid policy of building Jewish settlements in the West Bank and the Golan Heights, the Western World will always be targeted by Muslim jihadists, either operating as part of underground terrorist cells or as unpredictable lone wolves. The only truly way to be safe from such attacks, at least while the West is involved in wars in the Muslim world, is to have absolutely no Muslims on their soil, either as citizens, permanent residents, tourists, and diplomats. The only way to get rid of expanding Muslim minorities in secular western nations would be through a terrible and inhumane campaign of systematic genocide launched against them, and only a far right or far left military dictatorship would have the stomach to carry out such a program. Having Muslim minorities in Western nations is like playing Russian roulette, where the gambler may get lucky many times in a row, but is certain to get unlucky if he or she keeps playing long enough. A non-Muslim citizen or permanent resident living in a Western nation with a Muslim minority can only hope to be not unlucky enough to be at the wrong place at the wrong time when an Islamist and Jihadist inspired act of terrorism strikes, even if they are going about their ordinary business. What makes a Jihadist terrorist attack so galling is that it is carried out in the name of God at randomly selected non-Muslim victims. In addition, it is often the case that moderate, secular Muslims eventually turn into fundamentalist Islamists prone to Jihadist terrorism, or the parents of would-be Muslim terrorists, either by a gradual or rapid process. The day the world finds cheap alternatives to Arab oil and gas is a day when Muslim terrorists will become irrelevant. Personally, after having read the Quran and Sunna, and having come across its many intolerant, brutal, violent and puritanical passages, I have come to the view that secular Western nations should ban any further Muslim migration into their countries, especially where those minorities are increasing as a percentage of a nation's population. Secular nations in the Western World should also take away the rights of Muslim citizens to vote and serve on juries, and also take away the right of Muslims to be employed as judges, lawyers, politicians, military personnel, law enforcement officers, teachers of non-Muslims, and medical personnel. There should be no tolerance for intolerant Islamofascism. If current population trends continue, there will come a day in the future when the Jews in Israel, including the West Bank and the Golan Heights, will be outnumbered by Arab Muslims, Christians, and Druze, and such Jewish Christians as Hebrew Catholics, Messianic Jews, and Jews for Jesus (see in The New King James Version of the Bible The Acts of the Apostles 18:21, 20:6, 20:16; I Corinthians 16:8, Matthew 23:1-4, Matthew 26:17-35, Mark 14:12-25, Luke 22:14-23, John 13:1-38, John 7, I Corinthians 11:17-34, I Corinthians 9:20, and I Corinthians 10:32-33), which makes Israel's West Bank Wall all the more necessary. The Jews in Israel/Palestine will then form a besieged minority as did the Caucasians, Khoisans, mixed-race Coloreds, and Asians of the majority Bantu South Africans during the Apartheid years. So long as Jewish Israel refuses to allow the creation of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank, and refuses to withdraw its Jewish settlers there, Israel will always live with the fear and reality of terrorism committed against Jews by Palestinian Muslim terrorists.
Should a global nuclear war one day erupt in the future, be it near or distant, as a non-fundamentalist, Trinitarian (John 1:1-5, John 20:19-23, Matthew 18:18, The Acts of the Apostles Chapters 1 to 2, I Corinthians 12:3, and Luke 18:9-14) Christian freethinker, I believe that Jesus would return to Earth for the second time to save us from total annihilation, and to heal the world of radioactive fallout and rid it forever of evil. However, before that happened, the world would suffer great pain and tragedy. Although I believe that the Old and New Testament of the Bible is divinely inspired (II Timothy 3:16-17), I do not believe that it is 100% factually accurate or even 100% morally perfect. God's inspiration has been filtered through the imperfections of prejudiced, fallible, morally flawed, often ignorant and gullible human beings. Many of the books of the Bible were written or re-edited decades, if not centuries after the events they purport to record, and is therefore subject to embellishment, unhistorical myth and legend, and severe exaggeration. Much of the Bible is written in parables and metaphorical, non-literal allegory. Many of the Old and New Testament legends, myths and philosophies were borrowed from the ancient Assyrians, Sumerians, Babylonians, Persians, Phoenicians, Caananites, Aramaeans, Egyptians and Greeks. Jesus never wrote a word of the New Testament. Sometimes the Bible errs and contradicts itself, for example II Kings Chapters 9 to 10, Hosea 1:4-5, Exodus 20:3-6, Deuteronomy 5:7-10, Deuteronomy 24:16, Ezekiel 18, Exodus 25:18-22, Exodus 26:1, Exodus 26:31, and Exodus 32. God is a cosmic democrat. He allowed the universe to arise from the Big Bang, which in itself was the result of chance, random, vacuum fluctuations in vacuum energy, as described in quantum physics. Vacuum energy has its origin in an act of creation by God, who exists in a timeless, eternal present. The laws of physics emerged from the chaos which followed the Big Bang. Species evolve because of favorable, random, chance genetic mutations best fitted to survive to produce offspring in a given environment according to the laws of natural selection and survival of the fittest. Those persons born with a mental or physical disability were not deliberately made that way by God, but are the result of random, chance genetic mutations in past ancestors transmitted down the generations by means of heredity. God, the cosmic democrat, allows nature to make mistakes through random chance. Earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, asteroid and comet strikes, cyclones or hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, droughts, and bushfires or wildfires are not the acts or will of God, but simply God allowing nature to run its course, as are also diseases and epidemics, the latter of which are caused by random, chance genetic mutations in viruses and bacteria organisms. More or less gradual natural climate changes of the past, as opposed to rapid man-made climate change, are the result of regular changes in the path of the Earth's orbit around the sun and periodic changes in the tilt of the Earth's rotation around its axis. The Earth in its long history has undergone several mass species extinctions, and the evolution of the modern human species known as Homo Sapiens Sapiens (Latin for "very wise man") is a relatively new event in the history of life on Earth. There have been many human-like species in the past which are now extinct, although D.N.A. testing has shown that Neanderthal and Denisovan man mated with modern humans, even though the big majority of hybrid human and Neanderthal and Denisovan offspring were infertile, as are mules, the result of mating between horses and donkeys. Personally, I believe in Christian Universalism and of a temporary, hellish purgatory, because our choices are heavily influenced by our genes and environment (Matthew 26:41, Romans 7:18-25, Jeremiah 13:23, Jeremiah 18, and Romans Chapters 9 to 11). However, Satan, also known as Lucifer, and his following of fallen, rebel angels known as demons, as opposed to the heavenly army of angels loyal to God led by the archangel Michael (Revelation 12), rebelled against God out of their own pure free will, because they have no body, and therefore no genetic predisposition, to tempt them into sin. In the Old Testament, the archangel Lucifer was God's heavenly prosecutor and tester/tempter of sinful humans found on this planet we call Earth. Perhaps there are separate prosecuting and testing/tempting archangels for other planets in the unbridgeable vastness of the Universe, with sinful but dominant species. Satan takes advantage of our genetic predisposition to fall into sin and crime. Universal salvation might be found in such Biblical New Testament passages as Colossians 3:25, I Peter 3:18-20, I Peter 4:6, John 12:32, I Corinthians 15:28, I Timothy 4:10, Ephesians 1:9-10, Titus 2:11, and Luke 3:6. Although people cannot undo the harm caused to others by sin, God's grace can, because according to Matthew 19:26, Mark 10:27, and Luke 18:27, nothing is impossible with God, at least at the end of time. I do not believe in an early release from purgatory by means of prayers and indulgences for the dead, because according to the parables about purgatory taught by Jesus in Matthew 5:25-26 and Luke 12:58-59, the inmates of purgatory do not leave the prison of purgatory until they alone have paid off the last penny of the debt of their sins. Jesus taught in Luke 12:47-48 by means of parable that those whose sins are worse than that of others will be punished in purgatory more severely. The fires of purgatory produce mental anguish rather than physical suffering, as Saint Paul taught by means of parable in I Corinthians 3:10-15, and Jesus by means of parable in Luke 12:49-50. The author of II Peter 3:7-13 writes something similar to that taught by Jesus and Saint Paul, and as is also implied by the author of Revelation 20:9-11. The fires of purgatory are the same as the fire from the altar in heaven mentioned in Revelation 8:1-5, Revelation 20:9, and Isaiah 6:1-7. Heavenly fire is associated with the Holy Spirit as is written in Luke 3:16, Mark 9:49, and The Acts of the Apostles 2:1-4. The fire of God's love is tormenting to those in a hellish purgatory who have rejected God's love. Although a stay in purgatory is temporary, its duration can feel like a near eternity for those whose sins are especially serious and plentiful, because according to I John 5:16-17 some sins are worse than others.
I would urge the readers of this web site to forward its contents to such U.S. lobby groups as the Council on Foreign Relations and the Foreign Policy Association, since it has some influence over policy makers in the State Department and White House, as well as Congress. If anyone knows of any Chinese lobby groups within the U.S. I would ask them to forward it to them as well. For readers in China, India, Australia, and Europe itself, I would urge them to forward the contents of this web site to the relevant authorities.
(1). Peter R. Limburg, "Edward O. Wilson," in Science Year 1989: The World Book Annual Science Supplement, Chicago, U.S.A., page 369.
(2). Peter R. Limburg, pages 369-370.
(3). Jinger Hoop, "Jane Goodall's Challenge," in Science Year 1996: The World Book Annual Science Supplement, Chicago, U.S.A., page 113.
(4). Jinger Hoop, page 110.
(5). Adrian Goldsworthy, The Fall of the West: The Slow Death of the Roman Superpower, Paperback Edition published in 2010 by Phoenix, an imprint of Orion Books Ltd, London, United Kingdom, pages 91, 110, 119, 120, 141-142, 15-153, 205, 212-213, 210 and 260, 282, 315, 322-323, and 409. Adrian Goldsworthy, In the Name of Rome: The Men Who Won the Roman Empire, Paperback Edition published in 2004 by Phoenix, an imprint of Orion Books Ltd, London, United Kingdom, pages 177, 407, and 423-424. Roger Collins, Early Medieval Europe: 300-1000, The Macmillan Press Ltd, London, United Kingdom 1991, pages 44 and 89-90. Adrian Goldsworthy, The Fall of the West, pages 121, 214, 296, 299-300, 303-304, 307, 310-331, 336, 347, 356, 359-360, 372.
(6). Adrian Goldsworthy, The Fall of the West, pages 317-319.
By Ardent Seeker